From 1987 to 1989 a fellow named Jim Wright was Speaker of the House of Representatives. Wright had produced a book, ‘Reflections of a Public Man’ and it had sold quite a few copies even though it was nothing more than a compilation of political speeches he had performed over the years. Unfortunately for Speaker Wright, even though he had sold quite a few copies, he sold those quite a few copies to a very small group of people who all had business before congress that he was in a position to influence. In other words it was a scam, a bribe. Wright compiled speeches into a book, published the book, put a hefty price tag on the book and the people who wished to influence his political decisions bought the book by the thousands and tens of thousands – putting money in Wright’s pocket.

Wright was compelled to resign in disgrace.

When I read that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo allegedly made $783,000 in royalties from a book that sold 3,200 copies – I thought of the pioneering efforts in bribery of Jim Wright. Could it be that Governor Cuomo thought he was a tad more clever than Jim Wright and that he could get away with it?

Who isn’t appreciative of science and what it adds to the quality of our life? Who isn’t grateful that diseases that used to be a death sentence are now easily and routinely treated? Who isn’t grateful that an acre of soil yields more tons of yummy nutrients than ever in history? Who isn’t grateful that we have more available energy in reach under the soil than at any time before now?

No, what some people disingenuously call a disregard for science is actually opposition to political agendas opportunistically attached to science…and sometimes not even science, but speculation. More on that in a minute. But, first, let’s discuss the limits of science.

Science is a method of inquiry to produce reliable information. Watch. Hypothesize. Test. Check results. Report information. Science is not a body of information or a consensus or a political agenda. Science is not a prescription for policy. Science is a method to produce useful information to make choices. Consider:

What if science (and road engineers and actuaries) could establish that a universal 25 mph speed limit would save X thousand lives per year? Would science therefore dictate that society adopt a 25 mph speed limit? Would opponents of the life-saving speed limit be “science deniers”?

Of course not. Everyone knows choices involve trade offs. Slower speed limits would produce all kinds of loss and hardship. Longer working days. Produce rotting before it gets to the shelves. Fewer meetings and appointments because of the time required. And dates. Men and women would have a harder time enjoying dates. And so on.

Science can provide the information about the trade offs. But then, people need to apply value judgments to decide how to respond. In some cases, those value judgments might need to take the form of public policy. Which gets us to the real issue here, global warming.

The “March for Science” is almost certainly a leftist stalking horse to insult the public for not buying into the leftist demand to abandon fossil fuels, impoverish billions, lavishly enrich some cronies, and start sucking hard on a tiny straw to live on “green energy.”

Without getting into the weeds about all the problems of catastrophic global warming theory, let’s just observe a few things. There is no “consensus” or 97% agreement that human activity is destroying the habitable planet. There is observation that the earth is warming, and has been, since the mini ice age ended in about 1800.

The role that carbon dioxide plays in that warming is unknown. All the models that assign it a villainous role have been wrong in their projections about what temperature would do. In fact, the earth is no in a 20-year pause in warming and the warmalarmists can’t explain that.

Moreover, nothing about warming is a fact established by the scientific method. It is a projection, established by computer models, that have been wrong in every case, but that we are endlessly beaten about the head and shoulders by pundits telling us that 97% agree…on something.

Whether warming, if it resumes and continues, will ultimately produce more harm or more good is also unknown. Humans have generally fared better in warmer periods than in colder periods. Carbon dioxide has been higher while temperatures have been lower. Whether cutting off affordable energy that has lifted billions out of poverty will even affect global temperatures is also unknown.

All that we know is that corrupt, unscientific organizations like the United Nations, hackepreneurs like Al Gore, profiteers like Tom Steyer, and sneering leftists like the New York Times are demanding that people surrender their comfort and quality of life to a new regimen controlled by politicians,. hackepreneurs, profiteers, and sneering leftists.

By the way, if science is so infallible, why are they just figuring out that fat and salt and eggs are not so villainous but sugar might be? Seems like something they could have observed decades ago. But I’m sure they’ve got earth’s atmosphere dialed down and nailed cold. And can manage it like a thermostat. And where are the science lovers when science indicates GMOs and nuclear power can offer safe miracles? Or that fetuses have brains and a heartbeat? Or that genitals are real things, not social constructs?

So, while I am super grateful for the next advance against cancer, or in nanotechnology, or 3-D printing, I will fight hard to keep my coal and natural gas and comfortable thermostat setting, and roll my eyes about anyone’s “March for Science.” I hope they soaked George Soros for millions. I’m pretty sure they didn’t pick up their trash.

A one-two punch against nature lovers came out of Western Colorado this week as news reported that vandals defaced trees and rocks with spray paint on the beautiful trail leading to Hanging Lake in Glenwood Canyon, and US Forest Service Officials responded by considering closing the trail until June. This amounts to tragedy topped by absurdity.

Hanging Lake is one of the jewels of Colorado’s mountains. An emerald pool perched in a limited flat hugging the steep Glenwood Canyon walls, it is accessible only after a very steep and challenging mile and a half hike on a trail that in some places is cut into the canyon wall. It draws thousands of enchanted hikers every year, some fit and seasoned and some barely able to struggle up to the magical little place. Somewhere along the trail and near the lake, a little pond, really, cretin destroyers spray painted their chosen messages on various rocks and trees. There will be, and needs to be, a prompt effort at cleaning and restoration.

It is depressing to think about the atomized world we live in where punks tarnish beauty with meaningless phrases to intrude on the enjoyment of all who follow. But, it is also troubling to think about the response of public land managers. Aaron Mayville, the area District Ranger promised to work with local law enforcement to find and prosecute the criminals who did this. That is certainly appropriate. But, the Forest Service is also making noises about closing the trail until peak summer season when additional Ranger patrols will be on staff to guard against further vandalism.

That would be outrageous. “Then the terrorists will win” would be one way to describe the bad thinking behind that idea. It is impossible to protect the great outdoors against bad acts by stupid people. Excluding the masses of nature loving visitors who want to see one of the really beautiful places around is not a reasoned response to the malice of a few. It is unfortunate and maddening that the experience of visitors will be marred until the cleanup up is done. But locking them out is collective punishment that bears no relation to the real goal of finding and punishing the miscreants who caused the problem.

It can be hoped that this is merely huffing an puffing by a public steward who loves the acres he administers, and is pained to see them desecrated. That would be reasonable and understandable. Throwing up a “Keep Out” fence would not.